The keywords that are only spoken in hushed whispers, in the back alleys of the Game of Thrones meta.

"I would play him," they say, "but that ally trait holds me back."

"And that condition too, is incredibly good but, well, it's a condition. Too vulnerable."

I think we've all heard these kinds of things. It seems a good number of cards are labelled, liberally, as "unplayable" because of a trait that is judged as too easy to handle. Aerys Oakheart, Varys, and a few others put allies in their place (though they, themselves, are allies...), while Maester Cressen and Maester Lemonwood shrug off conditions.

So what does this mean when it comes time to build a deck? Are these cards really off the table, or is all of this overblown? This week's Two Guys, One Throne outlines why that one copy of Varys in your opponent's deck probably shouldn't keep you from building something that works, and works well . But of course, there are counterpoints to be made, and much DISSENSION to explore.

Are these traits really as bad as some would believe?

haha...much dissension indeed.

~What kind of question is this, you insolent newbs?!

In all seriousness, good job with the podcast guys! I don’t listen to every episode but like what you’re doing. You have a lot of promise and I think this regional season will be really great exposure from what sounds to be a pretty insulated playgroup. Limiting yourselves to one faction is understandable from a cost standpoint, but may narrow your focus and perspective a bit much. Also, from what it sounds like, you’ve left a lot of the maester options unexplored… I don’t believe The Maester’s Path agenda was even discussed in your Agendas N Hate episode!

I view attachments in general as REALLY fragile, Condition trait or not. I’d say that I’ve seen more successful decks shy away from any attachment that costs 2 or more. The Tin Link (probably one of the most powerful attachments out there) is one of the main reasons. On top of that, beneficial attachments (I mean ones that bolster your characters) are even more fragile because we have a bit more kill in the environment and (although recently knocked down a bit) ghaston grey to contend with so it’s not necessarily likely that character with the attachment will be in play for much of the game. Does that mean a Bodyguard or Burned and Pillaged doesn’t make a deck? Probably not, but I’m not very likely to play Blood of the Dragon. More recently, I’ve even found myself looking at tossing in a few 1g or 0g attachments just to protect against Flame Kissed (Targ burn has found a resurgence here in SD) and also to safeguard against Search and Detain. So to somewhat answer your question, I don’t really care if it’s a condition since the big mean Tin Link doesn’t discriminate. I should also note that it does depend on the deck too... recursion (LDC/bronze link) and setup potential also play a role.

As for the Ally/Mercenary traits, my general rule of thumb is to be sensitive when adding just a few to my deck because they’ll be fragile. I’ll either load up on ‘em (so many targets the couple that are discarded won’t matter), try not to depend on the ones I include, or not include any at all (opponent won’t be able to realize the full potential some of their cards!). The tide was turned on My Stark Maesters deck recently when I saw my 5 cost Littlefinger get discarded off the board in a crucial round, so I need to stick to my own advice! Also keep in mind that trait manipulation does exist (Copper Link, Lion’s Gate, Bael the Bard, Old Nan, that new lanni knight, etc) so some decks are going to have as much ally/mercenary hate as possible and really do make the most of Oakhart/Jorah/Dissension/etc. That’s why the Carrion Bird was errata’d btw! Also Lanni and Martell are probably among the strongest houses right now and both have a lot of allies, so seeing this hate is not uncommon.

That said… good question! I hope my answer helps shed some light. Again, these are just my thoughts so I’m interested in hearing what other folks have to say.

Bronson,

You totally called it. The Maester agenda is one of the last hurdles that we need to jump before really feeling comfortable in the environment. We've got a solid Targ burn going, Martell control and GG decks, Lannister kneel/intrigue/clansmen decks, stark murder/army decks, Bara knights deck, and my GJ iterations. The one thing lacking is a really serious Maester deck. I expect to get trounced by it a few times before I start to understand it. It's daunting to try to build it up to me for some reason. Any suggestions on handling such a deck would be quite helpful. I've included Nighttime Raid in my current GJ deck just because I'm worried about the Maesters, though I've never played against them

That's really why there's a focus on basic concepts right now. We've got at least a year or so to go until we can speak on things like you guys can, but theory can cross from and into all sorts of games, especially when you're comparing lessons from one card game to another. And the grand secret is that I have a degree in Philosophy, so I am the ultimate arbiter of logic and reason! ( <--- joking )

Thanks for the comments, and I can't wait to see if, eventually, I'm caught up in the "1-of" meta as well. It still just makes no sense to me that all of the ally hate comes from allies...which is a self-defeating argument.

I'm sure I'll have some actual agreements and/or counterarguments after listening to the episode, but at the moment, I do want to point out for factual clarity that only half of the anti-Ally cards are Allies themselves. Varys and Jorah are, but Dissension and Oakheart aren't. And considering that it's possible to play Dissension and discard caracters multiple times a game without the additional shennanigans that the unique characters need, I'd probably give the slight edge to the non-Ally side of the ally hate.

A slight addendum to my previous post is that by and large, those characters being Allies themselves, is a rather moot point. By the time their own Ally trait matters most of the time, they've already done their dirty work by coming into play. I think the majority of the Allies that folks do worry about are more along the lines of Littlefinger in that they need to remain in play to provide value through challenges or the like rather than just trigger as they CIP.

Though, it's also worth noting that the passive nature of Varys' and Jorah's abilities (also the only two that are Allies) effectively prevents them from coming into play unless your opponent has an Ally- otherwise they discard your forces and possibly themselves.

I don’t know if the ~ is popular on other forums, but I’ve learned on here that it precedes a joke or sarcasm. Feel free to embrace that e-shorthand, ~O Great Philosopher!

One Maester deck might bring you up to speed on what the links do, but there’s a TON of different builds/styles/flavors. They’re strong too. Maesters have won the last 4 tourneys I’ve been a part of. You guys will probably love it because you can thin out your draw deck by placing links on the agenda! How to handle various maester decks is a whole separate discussion. There's probably much more lengthy discussion out there somewhere (maybe someone else with more motivation or search savvy can post a link), but sticking with what you do to win (i.e. choke, kneel, burn, asswhoop) is a good idea and I don’t recommend deviating that much to try and tech specifically against maesters. More suggestions (probably painfully obvious) on handling maester decks are:

- KILL THEIR MAESTERS (no maesters out there means no links off their agenda… did I mention Targ burn has made a resurgence in my neck of the woods?)
- Don’t let your opponent win a challenge (Can’t believe I’m listing this but honestly, if you prevent them from winning challenges they can’t place links)
- Remove the maester trait and the links fall off (Nightmares is a good neutral event for this)
- Run the Bastard attachment or other attachment removal (list goes on)

To round out this answer, note the last two still allow them to get links off their agenda because the agenda now refers to the “Printed” maester trait. Again, pretty obvious answers from me, but you asked!

One more thing to say going into regional season… be sure to enjoy yourselves and hang out with other AGoT players from different groups! I’m no veteran of other card games or even board games, but have stuck with AGoT because of the great community that exists. And sorry for completely derailing the thread. Now… back to the ally/merc/condition discussion!

Bronson said:

I don't think the highlighted part is always true, sorry The Agenda does say 'printed' Maesters, but with the exception of the Apprentice Collar, the chains also all say they go on "Maester only" characters- so even if the agenda can trigger because they are still 'printed' Maesters, they still cannot receive the chains because they are not ACTUAL maesters at the time, so the chain cannot be removed from the Agenda.

imrahil327 said:

Seems pretty straightforward. Card has the printed Maester trait. Agenda says "attach 1 chain from this card to a printed maester you control." If the card no longer is a maester, it can still receive links from the agenda (because no matter what, it still has the printed maester trait) but the link falls off immediately due to the link's "Maester character only" requirement. If it has bastard, they lose any existing links but still get to keep any new links put on that char because bastard says "cannot have attachments played on it" and the agenda puts the attachments into play. You can correct me (again) if I'm wrong, Chris, but I think this has been touched on a couple times already, especially with regard to the bastard attachment:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=16&efcid=4&efidt=598126&efpag=0#605512

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=18&efcid=4&efidt=629005&efpag=0#629350

You are correct on Bastard. You can move links to a character with Bastard, since it's a put into play effect, not a play effect. If the Maester loses his trait, you cannot even try to move a non-Apprentice Collar chain from the agenda. It's the same thing as trying to choose Cannot be Killed characters for military claim, you cannot do it.

After a good night's sleep and a quick search, I'll agree that you guys are right about adding non-apprentice collar links to pre-printed maesters that have lost their trait... so I stand corrected! Sorry for the confusion there. Here's the link where this was discussed more thoroughly:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=18&efcid=4&efidt=592806&efpag=0#609714

I guess now we can move back to the ally/merc/condition talk? Annnnd go!

Nice episode guys, just one thing... I don't think you can use Naval Escort to win Dominance; Dominance is determined before any player action windows.

Bronson said:

I mean, since no one else has answered, I think that pretty well proves my opinion definitive.

Kennon said:

Well, I'd disagree with you on the Dissension part. Hard to fit into decks, and if you look at most high placing decks from tournaments, you rarely see Dissension in there. Event slots are at too high a premium for something that *might* be useful, depending on your opponents deck. Most of the time you'll be hitting one refugee or cheap ally, and unlike the Ally your event is useless at setup.

So, the important cards are really Jorah, Arys, Varys, since they are really cost-effective in general. This effectively means you'll be getting hit by approximately 0.5-1 ally discarding effects per game (going through approximately half of their deck, with 1-2 cards in there that hit Allys). Additionally, most players don't expect you to be running costly Allys (like, say, Salladhor) and will spend their Ally discard as soon as they see a target. For the simple reason, that there might not be another opportunity to hit one, and cards like Varys may end up being completely useless if there is no other target.

So... I guess I'd hesitantly agree with Bronson's thinking on running a few Allys probably being worse than not running at all, or running a lot? The correct choice will of course depend on the deck (how much will the Allys make your deck better?) and meta (how Ally-phobic are the players? Is Lanni played a lot?).

Not that I disagree entirely about the rest of the post, but for my curiosity.... where are you seeing lists for top tournament decks?

Kennon said:

Well, there has been a bit of a slump in tourneys, so a bit hard to gauge the post-FAQ environment and would be interested in seeing some info myself...

However, since Dissension has been around for ~1 year now, if it was really efficient, I'd expect to have seen it in several Top 4 placed decks? Going on a bit of a limb here, but I'm thinking that the only high ranking decks where it actually has been were the Lanni Trait-manipulation decks that were springing up pre-Carrion Bird errata. Someone can probably fill me in on the US side of the recent OCTGN Tourney, but I don't remember seeing it in the decks that were doing well or made the cut on the EU side. I have of course been known to be fallible.

~ Oh! And then there was this "Abomination" thing that apparently did well somewhere before the recent errata... No Dissension there either.

The Ally trait becomes more of a detriment the higher the cost of the character. I don't mind losing a 1 or 2 cost ally to Dissension, because ultimately they're not getting a great return on their investment of opportunity cost to play Dissension in their deck. For example, this is why the new Bronn is imo unplayable, and what makes Littlefinger still playable (because if you include him in your deck you'll probably have enough shadows to be able to reduce it to around 2-3, which is the max I would pay for an Ally. Of course, that analysis breaks down if you're running trait manipulation.

In terms of Varys, Arys, and now Jorah. Arys is the superior character because it's playable even if your opponent isn't running allies, and it still does something once it hits the table (he has renown). Because he is more playable, he single-handedly is a threat to mercenaries, but in general, mercenaries aren't that risky to play (if you can find the few mercenaries in the cardpool that are really that efficient to begin with). I don't consider Daario that much of a threat because he is a 3-cost-2-strength character and can be killed by burn and VB.